Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + HC Income Tax - 2023 (3) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2023 (3) TMI 1455 - HC - Income TaxAddition u/s 68 - credit worthiness of the investor questioned/doubted - whether Tribunal was right in holding that the Assessing Officer was not justified in holding investor to be not credit worthy? - Revenue’s case is that investor had suffered loss during 2003, 2004 and 2006 and therefore, assessee’s claim with regard to his investment in the Company was doubtful - HELD THAT:- Tribunal, which is the last fact finding authority has recorded that remittances were made on two dates namely 31.05.2007 and 05.06.2007 and both these dates are relevant for A.Y. 2008-09. Net income of the investor was USD 33,12,256 whereas the remittances are only USD 10 Lakhs. There is no other material on record to draw any contrary inference. Therefore, on facts, the Tribunal having recorded as aforesaid, we find no ground to interfere in the Revenue’s appeal insofar as first and second questions are concerned. Whether the Tribunal was right in setting aside the addition made? - The proper course for the AO as held in para 11(ii) of NRA Iron and Steel (P.) Ltd. [2019 (3) TMI 323 - SUPREME COURT] was to investigate the credit worthiness of the creditor and to ascertain whether the transaction was genuine. However, the Assessing Officer has chosen a reverse mode by calling upon the assessee to show that investor was credit worthy. We may record that the investor is none other than the son of the Director. Therefore, the Assessing Officer had all the material before him and power to cause proper investigation. Even otherwise, the factual matrix recorded by the ITAT that the remittances were through Bank and as against a net income of USD 3 Million, the remittances are only to the extent of USD 1 Million. In these facts, the third question also does not merit any consideration. Decided in favour of assessee.
|